Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine

1,645 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 299 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Freddy Antonio Contreras
  667 F.2d 976· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-12 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Miranda warnings given were adequate and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction.
• United States v. Orozco
  590 F.2d 789· 9th Cir.· 1979-02-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the search and seizure of evidence from the vehicle did not violate the Fourth Amendment, and the admission of TECS cards was proper.
• United States v. Grant
  545 F.2d 1309· 2d Cir.· 1976-10-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the evidence established that the defendant 'used a firearm to commit a felony' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) by using guns as part of a security operation for drug distribution, and that there was sufficient evidence of constructive possession of cocaine.
• Jackson v. State
  818 So. 2d 539· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-01-18 ·cited 47×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Terrance Jackson was convicted by jury of cocaine possession with intent to sell, marijuana possession, and felony fleeing from police. The appellate court reversed all convictions and remanded for new trial, finding insufficient evidence for two convictions and prejudicial prose
• United States v. Turner
  928 F.2d 956· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-20 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the evidence was not the fruit of an illegal detention and that the statutory sentencing disparity for cocaine base does not violate due process.
• United States v. Johns
  734 F.2d 657· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-18 ·cited 47×
  The court held that while the prosecutor's argument regarding the absence of an alibi witness was improper, it did not constitute plain error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt. The court affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Gooding
  695 F.2d 78· 4th Cir.· 1982-12-07 ·cited 47×
  The district court's finding that the defendant was free to leave during the initial questioning was a factual determination that should be affirmed.
• United States v. Karel Plisek
  657 F.2d 920· 7th Cir.· 1981-08-17 ·cited 47×
  The dissent argues that a sentencing judge improperly relied on their own evaluation of a prior acquittal's merits, violating due process.
• United States v. Sullivan
  578 F.2d 121· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-10 ·cited 47×
• United States v. Garcia
  531 F.2d 1303· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-24 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination of government witnesses regarding a confidential informant's past activities, nor in refusing requested jury charges on knowledge and specific intent.
• United States v. Gallo
  927 F.2d 815· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-19 ·cited 46×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the stop of the defendant's car was justified by traffic violations and the search of a box within the car was a valid inventory search, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Pettit
  903 F.2d 1336· 10th Cir.· 1990-05-25 ·cited 46×
  The court affirmed the conviction but reversed the sentence, finding the upward adjustment for role in the offense was improperly applied.
• United States v. Edwards
  898 F.2d 1273· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-02 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the officers had reasonable suspicion to briefly detain the defendant's luggage for a narcotics-detection dog sniff, and the initial encounter was consensual, thus not implicating the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Heriberto Diaz
  876 F.2d 1344· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-09 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination of a government informant, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Dunn
  846 F.2d 761· D.C. Cir.· 1988-05-13 ·cited 46×
  The court held that expert testimony describing a drug operation's modus operandi, without directly stating whether the defendant had the requisite mental state, does not violate Fed.R.Evid. 704(b).
• United States v. Stewart
  770 F.2d 825· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-04 ·cited 46×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence, remanding for resentencing due to procedural errors in the sentencing process.
• United States v. Hernandez-Cuartas
  717 F.2d 552· 11th Cir.· 1983-10-17 ·cited 46×
  The admission of drug courier profile testimony for background purposes, even without objection at trial, does not constitute plain error if it was not used as substantive evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Tegzes
  715 F.2d 505· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in conducting voir dire, denying a mistrial, or refusing to excuse a juror for cause, and that the appellants' other claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Hughes
  658 F.2d 317· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-05 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the admission of cocaine into evidence was proper despite a break in chain of custody, and that limitations on cross-examination and exclusion of certain evidence did not prejudice the defendant.
• United States v. Buenaventura-Ariza
  615 F.2d 29· 2d Cir.· 1980-01-03 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the federal narcotics agents lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct the investigatory stop, as the appellants' conduct was not sufficiently unusual or indicative of criminal activity when viewed objectively.
• United States v. Botero
  589 F.2d 430· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-09 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the appellants' Fourth Amendment rights were not violated by the use of electronic tracking devices, the warrantless entry to arrest Botero, or the search warrant affidavit, and that Cantalupo's post-arrest statements were admissible.
• United States v. Clark J. Umentum
  547 F.2d 987· 7th Cir.· 1976-11-24 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the conspiracy statute 21 U.S.C. § 846 does not require proof of an overt act, and that the jury instructions, when considered as a whole, fairly stated the law and did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Fischer
  531 F.2d 783· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-17 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial judge's comments on the credibility of defense witnesses constituted reversible error, and that the handling of motions to compel disclosure of a confidential informant also constituted error requiring remand.
• United States v. McCLAIN
  531 F.2d 431· 9th Cir.· 1976-02-13 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the defendant's car was permissible under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, and that while the admission of hearsay evidence to show predisposition was error, it was harmless.
• United States v. Serna-Barreto
  842 F.2d 965· 7th Cir.· 1988-03-29 ·cited 45×
  The court held that an investigatory stop, even with a drawn weapon, can be lawful if justified by the circumstances and officer safety concerns, and does not automatically constitute an arrest.
• United States v. Elbert Grayson
  625 F.2d 66· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-28 ·cited 45×
  Evidence consisting solely of the quantity of a controlled substance seized is sufficient to uphold an inference of intent to distribute.
• United States v. Barnes
  586 F.2d 1052· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-22 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit plain error by failing to sua sponte instruct the jury on the limited use of impeachment evidence or prior offenses, and that the admission of a coconspirator's hearsay statement, though erroneous, did not substantially influence
• Philome Mondesir v. State
  814 So. 2d 1172· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-04-17 ·cited 44×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that a conviction for possession of a firearm during the commission of other felonies is duplicative and violates double jeopardy, but that sentences for substantive firearm offenses must be served consecutively to sentences for other felonies.
• United States v. Alvis Jacobo
  934 F.2d 411· 2d Cir.· 1991-05-23 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court erred in believing it was bound by the jury's quantity finding for sentencing purposes and must make its own findings regarding the defendants' intent and ability to distribute the negotiated quantity of drugs.
• United States v. Hoelscher
  914 F.2d 1527· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-18 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed convictions, finding substantial evidence supported conspiracy, possession, and distribution charges, and that evidentiary and procedural rulings were not erroneous.
• Wheeler v. State
  549 So. 2d 687· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-08-16 ·cited 44×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Larry Wheeler was convicted of both sale of cocaine and possession of cocaine with intent to sell under the same Florida statute. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the statutory structure of section 893.13(1)(a) demonstrates legislative intent to punish on
• United States v. Alvarado
  882 F.2d 645· 2d Cir.· 1989-08-09 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the admission of redacted statements from a nontestifying codefendant, where names were replaced by neutral pronouns, did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation. It also held that sufficient evidence supported the conviction for usi
• Worth Moses McCULLOUGH v. State
  541 So. 2d 720· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-04-05 ·cited 44×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to prove intent to sell cocaine, as it was not inconsistent with a reasonable hypothesis of innocence.
• United States v. Richardson
  848 F.2d 509· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-21 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine, but reversed the conviction for violating the Travel Act due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Sokolow
  831 F.2d 1413· 9th Cir.· 1987-01-28 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the DEA agents possessed reasonable and articulable suspicion to detain Sokolow and his luggage, and that the subsequent detentions and dog sniffs were permissible under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Espinosa-Guerra
  805 F.2d 1502· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-16 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the seizure of the defendant was supported by reasonable suspicion and did not ripen into an arrest until probable cause existed, thus reversing the suppression order.
• United States v. Hilton
  772 F.2d 783· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-30 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the prosecutor's actions did not improperly bolster witness testimony because there was no indication of extrinsic evidence convincing the prosecutor of the defendants' guilt.
• United States v. Esdaille
  769 F.2d 104· 2d Cir.· 1985-08-01 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow the defendant to present a voice exemplar demonstrating a heavy accent without subjecting himself to cross-examination, due to the exemplar's low probative value and potential for prejudice.
• United States v. Netz
  758 F.2d 1308· 8th Cir.· 1985-04-12 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for importing and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and that venue was proper in the Western District of Missouri.
• United States v. Wright
  742 F.2d 1215· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-18 ·cited 44×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a judgment of acquittal for Stearns on the conspiracy charge, and that the jury's verdict of conviction on the lesser included offense should be reinstated. The court affirmed all other convictions.
• United States v. McCLURE
  734 F.2d 484· 10th Cir.· 1984-05-09 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance, discovery, or a specific jury instruction, and that the indictment was sufficient.
• United States v. Manfredi
  722 F.2d 519· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-21 ·cited 44×
  The court held that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry into the defendants' hotel rooms and that the officers' reasonable belief of peril justified non-compliance with the "knock and announce" statute.
• United States v. DeLUTIS
  722 F.2d 902· 1st Cir.· 1983-12-06 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove Michael DeLutis was a party to the conspiracy, reversing his conviction. The convictions of George and Shirley Eunis were affirmed.
• United States v. Federico
  658 F.2d 1337· 9th Cir.· 1981-10-13 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy conviction and that the co-conspirator's statements and seized evidence were properly admitted.
• United States v. Bower
  575 F.2d 499· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-19 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing the firearms count to go to the jury and that the defendant's claims of constitutional violations and entrapment were without merit.
• United States v. Swiderski
  539 F.2d 854· 2d Cir.· 1976-06-11 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court erred by improperly placing the burden of proof on the defendant for the entrapment defense and by refusing to give an entrapment instruction to one of the defendants. The court also found the instruction regarding the scrutiny of an informer's
• Duncan v. State
  986 So. 2d 653· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-07-02 ·cited 43×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Willie James Duncan appealed his conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell, challenging the sufficiency of evidence regarding constructive possession. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, finding that the state presented sufficient evidence
• United States v. Spears
  965 F.2d 262· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-02 ·cited 43×
  The court adopts a 'clearly erroneous' standard of review for probable cause determinations, but this standard does not resolve circuit disagreements on the level of deference owed.
• United States v. Pollock
  926 F.2d 1044· 11th Cir.· 1991-03-15 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the stop was lawful, consent to search was valid, and prior conviction evidence was admissible to prove intent. However, the evidence was insufficient to prove a continuous course of conduct for the Travel Act conviction.
• United States v. Alphonso Galloway Burroughs
  830 F.2d 1574· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-03 ·cited 43×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the government's failure to disclose the wife's immunity was not a Brady violation because the defense learned of it and presented it to the jury, and the evidence was not material. Venue was proper as the defendant had a continuing stake in the drug sales in